InsideClimate News: In Trump, U.S. Puts a Climate Denier in Its Highest Office and All Climate Change Action in Limbo

Guest post by David Middleton

This is the best election aftermath I have ever seen… and I’ve been voting since 1977.  This even tops 1980…

In Trump, U.S. Puts a Climate Denier in Its Highest Office and All Climate Change Action in Limbo

His anti-regulatory stances, support of unfettered fossil fuel production, and his threat to pull the U.S. out of the Paris agreement, send ripple effects worldwide.

BY MARIANNE LAVELLE, INSIDECLIMATE NEWS

NOV 9, 2016

Donald Trump’s astonishing victory has turned the world of climate action upside down, setting back U.S. environmental policy and threatening the international drive to cut carbon pollution and slow global warming.

The stunning upset by Trump, who has routinely suggested that climate change is a hoax, threatens to unravel President Obama’s climate action agenda, built on executive orders and regulations, including the Environmental Protection Agency’s carbon clampdown at power plants. Trump has vowed to “cancel” the Paris climate agreement, but could cripple it by merely retreating from the U.S. commitment. As the world’s second-biggest emitter of carbon dioxide pollution, the U.S. could render the global treaty meaningless, at a time when scientists are urging nations to quickly raise their ambition, or risk an escalating climate crisis.

[…]

In another disappointing outcome for climate advocates, Republicans maintained their control of the Senate, winning eight of 11 key races, as well as keeping their majority in the House of Representatives. Both chambers are strongly opposed to climate action policies.

The nation’s climate leaders were left stunned, somber, angry and reflective. They had already prepped their wish lists for Clinton that included a massive clean energy spending program, a moratorium on fossil fuel leases on federal lands and other rules…

[…]

Now, with little chance to have their agenda heard in Washington, environmental groups will be forced to play defense. At first, that will mean an effort to block Trump’s plans, perhaps by convincing Senate Democrats to block appointments or use the filibuster. Legal challenges are another avenue, but Trump will be able to quickly make his mark on the judiciary, with his appointment of a Supreme Court justice.

Trump has signaled plans to populate his cabinet with oil industry executives and allies, to eliminate the EPA, and to cut all federal spending on the United Nations climate process. Trump has claimed that he will save $100 billion over eight years, which appears to be based on a plan to end federal funding for solar and wind energy, efficiency, batteries, clean cars and climate science, wrote Joe Romm, a former Energy Department official and founder of the Center for American Progress’ Climate Progress blog.

Basically, Trump has promised an America-first, drill-baby-drill energy policy. He has promised unfettered production of coal, oil and natural gas and to “bring the coal industry back 100 percent.”

Trump said he will rescind any regulations that unduly burden energy development, including the Clean Power Plan, which, if it survives legal challenges, was to have been the cornerstone of Obama’s climate action legacy and the main policy for realizing the nation’s Paris goals.

[…]

Jeff Holmstead, a lawyer who represents coal-burning utilities and who spent four years as an assistant administrator in the EPA under President George W. Bush, said that if the courts don’t kill the Clean Power Plan, Trump will have a number of other options. “I think it’s certain the Clean Power Plan will be revoked,” he said this morning. “The only question is how.”

For his energy and environmental policy team, Trump has selected one of the nation’s most prominent climate contrarians, Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, to head his EPA transition. Ebell worked on policy for the tobacco industry before his years of work opposing environmental regulations and sowing doubt on climate science. Trump is also reported to be considering Harold Hamm, chief executive of fracking industry leader Continental Resources, for energy secretary, and Forrest Lucas, co-founder of oil products company Lucas Oil, for interior secretary.

[…]

Trump will be the only world leader who rejects [junk] science, according to a study by the Sierra Club. This is a particularly tough pill for climate activists to swallow.

[…]

Seven of the eight Koch-backed Senate candidates were victorious; the network’s only loss was to Masto. The Koch brothers’ effort was bolstered by massive spending by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other conservative and anti-regulatory organizations, including the National Rifle Association.

InsideClimate News reporter Zahra Hirji contributed reporting.

Notes to Zahra Hirji:

President-elect Donald Trump is not a “climate denier.”  He has never denied the climate.  To my knowledge, no AGW skeptic has ever denied the climate.  As a professional geologist with a fairly good working knowledge of the English language, I am fairly certain that it is both scientifically and linguistically impossible to deny the climate.

“President Obama’s climate action agenda, built on executive orders and regulations” was designed to be unraveled because he did it all with a “pen and a phone,” rather than through legislation.  Anyone with an eraser and white-out can “unravel” it.

4_172016_b1-babb-obama-erase8201

“Trump has vowed to ‘cancel’ the Paris climate agreement, but could cripple it by merely retreating from the U.S. commitment.” Well, d’uh!  Since the Paris climate agreement was not submitted to the Senate for ratification as a treaty or enabled by legislation from Congress, it is nothing more than an agreement between outgoing President Obama and the other signatories.  In 70 days or so, it will be null & void.

“Republicans maintained their control of the Senate, winning eight of 11 key races, as well as keeping their majority in the House of Representatives” because the voters voted for them.  This ought to be a clue as to the opinion of the majority of the voters regarding “climate change action.”

“Trump has signaled plans to populate his cabinet with oil industry executives and allies, to eliminate the EPA, and to cut all federal spending on the United Nations climate process” and he still won the election by a rather wide margin (only the Electoral Vote matters, it says so in the Constitution).

“For his energy and environmental policy team, Trump has selected one of the nation’s most prominent climate contrarians, Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, to head his EPA transition. Ebell worked on policy for the tobacco industry before his years of work opposing environmental regulations and sowing doubt on climate science. Trump is also reported to be considering Harold Hamm, chief executive of fracking industry leader Continental Resources, for energy secretary, and Forrest Lucas, co-founder of oil products company Lucas Oil, for interior secretary.”  To which I say…

 

 

0 0 vote
Article Rating
403 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Shinku
November 10, 2016 8:22 am

Please Have them investigate the entire thing under the RICO act and further enforce that it is indeed a SCAM.

Reply to  Shinku
November 10, 2016 9:43 am

We are talking about TWO distinct sets of investigations here – one into the misinformation on the science side (ClimateGate / NOAA temps doctoring, EPA shenanigans, etc), and the other concerning NGO / mainstream media efforts to push a 20-year meme about ‘industry corrupted skeptic climate scientists.’
“Greenpeace: The roots of Climate Smear” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/26/the-origin-of-climate-smear/
“The epicenter for the ‘Industry-corrupted Skeptic Climate Scientists’ Accusation” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=4482

Reply to  Russell Cook (@questionAGW)
November 10, 2016 10:01 am

Just in the last year NOAA has adjusted both the co2 record and temperature record. I wouldn’t have believed it, Sam Cougar just called me on in a response to the numbers of how co2 follows temperature, solar activity, and cosmic rays. Where did I get them ? NOAA. They are not the same ones he has.

Menicholas
Reply to  Russell Cook (@questionAGW)
November 10, 2016 2:07 pm

Sweet redemption is coming, and coming to stay!

Reply to  Russell Cook (@questionAGW)
November 10, 2016 2:22 pm

Trump now has a website up and is taking suggestions for his administration under a “Share Your Ideas” button at the bottom of the screen.
https://www.greatagain.gov/
I left my suggestion … to dismantle the Global Warming/Climate Change juggernaut.
It’s worth a shot.

Reply to  Russell Cook (@questionAGW)
November 10, 2016 3:16 pm

@ teapartygeezer…thanks for the link. That sounds worthwhile.

george e. smith
Reply to  Shinku
November 10, 2016 10:39 am

Don’t bet on PE Trump cleaning the slate.
The Republicans lost some ground in both the House and the Senate, and they were already do nothing woosies. And you still have all the big money bag watermelons paying off people everywhere.
But at least we might expect some common sense to prevail.
California is a totally lost cause; well the whole Pacific coast.
I am getting nauseated by all the inebriates who are clamoring from Hillary to sue because she won the popular vote.
There ISN’T any popular vote. The Sovereign States elect the President, and they each get one vote. They are weighted by the number of House seats each State has based on their population, but each State can cast their Electoral College votes any way their State laws or Constitutions permit.
Hillary apparently got 60 some odd percent of California votes. But California gave 100% of its electoral college tickets to Hillary and none to anybody else. They could have split it 60:40 Clinton:Trump if the State chose to do that. If ALL States did that, then the “popular vote” winner would also win the electoral college vote and become PE.
Think of the mess if the citizens of the world elected the personnel in the UN.
The US is a Federation of States, and those States pick the head of the Federation to run those things appropriate for the Federation to do, like National Defence. I think they are supposed to do something else, but at the moment I have forgotten what that was.
So all of the misfits are packing up to leave; mostly going to Canada; good luck with them, Canada.
Can you believe that Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the SCOTUS said she was moving to New Zealand.
Sorry Ruthie, but you have to have some marketable skills to get an immigration visa for NZ. You have none.
G

Shawn Marshall
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 12:22 pm

ne may wonder if we had voter ID what the tally of the popular vote might be. I suggest he DemoncRat tally would be very much lower. Temperatures are not the only variable subject to modification.

Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 12:30 pm

George we really don’t want them in Canada. Venezuela would be fine with me, that country could use some airheads on top of the rear ends they have ( and the airhead’s money). As far as ruthy is concerned, thanks for the laugh and I doubt she’d survive the flight.

Steve Keppel-Jones
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 12:35 pm

Hey! We have enough loonies in Canada already, starting with that Trudeau fellow! And Wynne who has already destroyed our Ontario electrical system. We don’t need any more. Send ’em to Australia or something 🙂

Reply to  Steve Keppel-Jones
November 10, 2016 1:10 pm

Venezuela or North Korea. I have nothing against Australians, and come to think of it, it would be cruel to impose more idiots on Venezuela or North Korea. An uninhabited arctic island?

Another Ian
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 1:30 pm

Re Shawn Marshall – the popular vote might not be finally tallied as yet
“pat
November 10, 2016 at 11:47 pm · Reply
just as MSM unnecessarily delayed allocating 270 electoral votes to Trump on Election night, probably hoping to stop Trump making a Victory speech (which, for legal reasons, it was in his interest to do that night), there has also been the ridiculous slowness in updating the count, allowing the MSM to make hay out of Clinton winning the popular vote. it’s been a huge meme amongst the orchestrated, & often violent, protestors:
but now they admit, after all the headlines, and violence:
RedditThe_Donald: Hey /all, Hillary has NOT won the popular vote. There are still roughly 14 million votes left to be counted and even CNN is projecting Trump will win the popular vote.
CNN: Presidential Election Results
CLICK TAB FOR “POPULAR VOTE”
PROJECTED WINNER: TRUMP
http://edition.cnn.com/election/results/president
Comment #33 at http://joannenova.com.au/2016/11/trump-victory-the-beginning-of-the-end-of-global-climate-scare/#comment-1855441

Mario Lento
Reply to  Another Ian
November 10, 2016 1:39 pm

That’s precisely why I want to know. I think this is more of the political hatchet jobs in play than anything else. Really pisses me off how the liberals create violence and hatred, while projecting the hate on the people they offend!!!

Ardy
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 3:54 pm

If the Arctic is warming so much why not send them to Wrangle Island where during 1913-1916 the Canadian expedition got trapped by ice and lost their ship.

Annie
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 4:06 pm

Hey Steve K-J! We’ve quite enough of our own air-head celebs DownUnder thank you very much!

Menicholas
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 6:26 pm

Relax…I am here to tell you that not a one of them is going to make good on their promise.
Self-important narcissism is a very peculiar thing.

average joe
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 7:19 pm

Everyone underestimates The Donald, and what he is capable of. Even now. George, I suggest you refrain from trying to predict what he will be able to do. Because most who try such an endeavor end up proven wrong. Amazed at what he has accomplished so far? You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Hivemind
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 8:02 pm

” Send ’em to Australia or something”
Hey, no !!!! We don’t want the worthless mouths. We already have too many illegal immigrants.

Reply to  Hivemind
November 11, 2016 10:54 am

YOu might want to do a mercy immigration for Madonna. She promised BJs for all Clinton voters, and based on the results, that is about 25 million (given only declared gender)

Reply to  Shinku
November 10, 2016 12:50 pm

I’d be happy to settle for at least a criminal investigation of Jagdish Shukla about misappropriation of government funds.

gnomish
Reply to  Shinku
November 10, 2016 1:16 pm

Some of the most controversial proposals Donald Trump made while running for US president were gone from his campaign website by Thursday… including his call to bar Muslims from entering the country and his promise to cancel the Paris Climate Agreement.
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-muslim-ban-removed-from-website-2016-11
http://imgur.com/mGIU8DS

Robin Hewitt
Reply to  gnomish
November 10, 2016 5:13 pm

Sounds like Obama got him with a neuralyzer.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  gnomish
November 11, 2016 3:08 pm

If you do “View All” you can scroll down and still find them if you know what date they were posted on.

G. Karst
Reply to  gnomish
November 13, 2016 12:05 pm

Trump says computer “glitch” removed many items from his agenda listing. They are supposedly restored now ??? GK
http://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-call-for-muslim-ban-back-on-website-after-glitch/

imark schooley
Reply to  Shinku
November 10, 2016 7:18 pm

I am a climate scientist. I grew up in Caiifornia I saw the ravages of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change. I have lots in Notrhwest Territories you need to buy NOW. I have lots of clients, AlGore, Leo, and other celebs, who have moved here.Right now they’re wearing fur and down oats in January, but they know that in 10 years, they’re going to be wearing shorts and tank tops up here. Like Leo just told me the other day, “I’ve sworn off private jets, dogsleds are my main transportation now.

Michael Kelly
Reply to  imark schooley
November 11, 2016 1:34 am

Anthony needs to install a “Like” button…almost as much as he needs to add spell check.

Eric Simpson
Reply to  imark schooley
November 15, 2016 1:03 am

I would like to have Likes.

Reply to  imark schooley
November 21, 2016 9:17 am

Anthony tried to add the like button but, I think the feature came with too much baggage.iirc

Editor
November 10, 2016 8:28 am

But, but … I only thought elections matter when they support my side. 😉
The election proves that everyone has a BS limit. The government, under Obama, obviously exceeded the BS limit of enough voters to get Trump elected. Time will tell if it is a good thing.

Marcus
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 8:58 am

And then Hillary held a rally with Jay Z where his language could not be aired on T.V. !! D’oh ! LOL

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:02 am

Petroleum ??

Ron Clutz
Reply to  Andy May
November 10, 2016 9:52 am

Scott Adams of Dilbert fame has interesting insights into Trump, the election and his Presidency.
https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2016/11/10/trump-appreciation-the-wisdom-of-dilbert/

george e. smith
Reply to  Ron Clutz
November 10, 2016 10:42 am

Thanx for reminding us of that travesty Latitude.
g

Latitude
Reply to  Andy May
November 10, 2016 10:36 am

The election proves that everyone has a BS limit.
==
With that thought in mind…
The spanish stations in South Florida were telling latins that Trump was going to come in the middle of the night and take them away…
..but they were using the picture of Elián González!!!!!!
It was Clinton that came in the middle of the night..and everyone knows it!comment image?zoom=2

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Latitude
November 10, 2016 12:56 pm

Latitude November 10, 2016 at 10:36 am
That is funny. worth a Putin laugh.
Now was it a real mistake, or did someone remember and know exactly what they were doing.
michael

Latitude
Reply to  Latitude
November 10, 2016 1:57 pm

“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity,”

Hugs
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 7:37 am

It was Clinton that came in the middle of the night..and everyone knows it!

The armed man in picture ready to use excess force does not look like Trump. Nor Clinton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers

Bill Yarber
Reply to  Andy May
November 10, 2016 10:37 am

Andy, well said! I’m looking forward to Trump’s actions on climate, energy, BLM, EPS, Exec Actions, race relations, foreign policy, military strength, illegal aliens, immigration and total erasure of the Obama Legacy/Presidency! A push for AGW skeptic positions would be a wonderful bonus!

jsuther2013
November 10, 2016 8:30 am

There was the apathy vote, which Clinton had, and there was the anger vote, which Trump had. That’s why the polls were so far off.

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 8:49 am

The pollsters failed to predict accurate turnout levels as well. Both party levels were down. 16% lower than bush/kerry. Trump/ Conway predicted very well that Pennsylvania would flip and that Florida (due to the Cuban issue) would be in play. Conway is a genius. Trump accurately assessed white middle class anger about immigration, trade and jobs. Where? WI, MI,MN,OH,PA… the old rust belt.

Jpatrick
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:14 am

You could argue that Clinton’s popular vote lead is explained by just California, but I would add Washington and Oregon into the mix as well.

Paul Westhaver
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:22 am

All Christians 79% TRUMP : 15% LIAR
Catholics 54 : 36
Evangelicals ~ 85 : 14

benofhouston
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 10:17 am

It was due to California. When I went to bed at midnight Tuesday, Trump had a million-vote lead in the popular. However, Cali kept churning out more returns for her through the next day.

Doug
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 10:22 am

Pretty simple, Trump was demonized. 5% of those polled were too embarrassed to admit they were voting him, even though they intended to.

MarkW
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 11:18 am

There are also the likely voter models. One of the factors is how many times has the person voted in the past. Trump brought out a lot of first time voters.

Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:10 pm

@JPatrick I recently moved to Washington state for a new job. When I was born here 30 years ago the state was predominantly red, or at least that’s what my parents tell me. Sad to see the ridiculousness that now flourishes here. We didn’t manage to send our electoral votes to Trump despite our efforts, but at least we managed to turn down the CO2 tax of fuel. I consider that a good win.
They did pass a minimum wage hike which I am not pleased about but you win some and you lose some, right?

Chimp
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:41 pm

Except for the ABC travesty, the tracking polls were right on. Not just IBD but LA Times and Rasmussen.
The regular surveys, as by NBC and CBS, were off, showing Clinton winning by mid-single digits, as did the ABC tracking poll. Cooked books. NBC sample had way too many Democrats.

Mario Lento
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:56 pm

I think the main point is that the polls were used to predict/project or determine that with almost 100% certainty Clinton would win the election. In that sense, most of the polls failed and were not useful indicators. Actually, I should state it another way. The polls were worse than not useful, they were manipulated in such a way as to point to a predetermined and wrong conclusion.

Barbara
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 1:35 pm

NY Times, Nov.10, 2016, Washington state
Scroll down to ballot measures: Initiative 732, Create Carbon Emission Tax
With 70% of precincts reporting:
Yes: 41.1%
No: 58.9%
Appears the ‘Create Carbon Emission Tax’ has been voted down.
Washington state voted for Clinton while not voting for a carbon tax?
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/washington

Michael J. Dunn
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 2:26 pm

Florida: I would suggest also that Trump had the support of Jewish retirees. He was the candidate with a credible promise of amity toward Israel.
Washington: I was born here in 1951 and it has always been Democrat dominated. We are the home of the International Workers of the World. In my father’s time, the nation was sometimes referred to as “the 47 states and the soviet of Washington.” What Republican governors we’ve had were indistinguishable from moderate Democrats. The most conservative governor in my memory was Dixy Lee Ray, and she was a Democrat. Plus, as was discussed recently on local talk radio, Republicans do not show up for the polls. Some serious GOP house-cleaning is necessary. The GOP candidates for Governor and Senator made hay of their rejection of Donald Trump. Guess how they finished in the polls. The Seattle city council is so dominated by flagrant socialists that they have made the city into a paragon of “tolerance” for homelessness, drug use, traffic constipation, and squalor. It is a crime that a place so blessed by God with natural beauty is drowning in the filth of human fecklessness.
Also, it was remarkable that Trump INVARIABLY drew GIGANTIC crowds to his rallies, and Clinton was reduced at one point to hiring stand-ins…yet no one in the nattering class had the wit to draw a conclusion from this fact. Talk about staring an elephant charge in the face and passing it off as a mirage.

Michael C. Roberts
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 5:01 pm

All – Yesterday I posted late, as my normal business responsibilities kept me from my favorite past time, reading WUWT.
As to a carbon tax in Washington State, I posted at lunch time yesterday on another thread, this factoid – it is appropriate now in this thread:
“…. but lest we forget, Jay Inslee was just re-elected as Governor in WA State last night, and he has already directed the State Department of Ecology to complete a hidden Carbon Tax, a ‘Poison Pill’ stealth tax on large Carbon (Dioxide) emitters:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/carbonlimit.htm
As you read through the regulatory text, you’ll see a few things: 1) The new tax will be invoked if and when the federal Clean Power Plan is not put into play (the ‘Poison Pill clause), and 2) Is justified by the EPA’s CO2 ‘Endangerment Finding’. So, the constituents of WA State are not out of the Carbon Tax Fog just yet.
Hoping that the EPA’s ‘Endangerment Finding’ is soon to be found as found-less, and only then could the State plan be deemed so as well.
I can dream big, can’t I
Regards,
MCR

Menicholas
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 6:31 pm

I was able to confidently predict a Trump win several months ago.
The Republican primary revealed that there was a shy Trump vote of several percent. He scored slightly better than his polls in every contest, and the places where he scored the most above his polling was in the places with the most vocal Trump haters, like the Rust Belt states and New England.
Knowing that and adding it to the polling results made it obvious, even if you did not pay any attention to the huge crowds he drew at rallies for well over a year.
But if you did happen to notice that he was drawing gigantic crowds at his rallies every single place he went, every day for over a year, that was even bigger clue that something was going on that wasn’t being shown in the polls

george e. smith
Reply to  jsuther2013
November 10, 2016 10:45 am

Well then some people simply said: ” At this point, what difference does it make ? ”
g

Mario Lento
Reply to  george e. smith
November 10, 2016 12:56 pm

BINGO

November 10, 2016 8:30 am

Nobody denies the climate or climate change. Zara Hirji starts off with a ridiculous statement, thus invalidating the rest of her text.

MarkW
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 8:52 am

If you can’t have a little fun during the day, why bother getting up?

afonzarelli
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 8:54 am

David, LUV yer “ha-ha” at the end there! (and all that you do…) Let me ask you, do you think that we’re going to be able to buy “real” (round) light bulbs again?

Marcus
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:06 am

afonzarelli, there is a “UGE” underground market for them in Ontario, Canada…especially in the North…

Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 2:02 pm

Oh yes. This has been my favorite post so far – Thank you, David. 🙂

afonzarelli
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 5:37 pm

Marcus, i live in new orleans (ontario is an awful long way to go for a light bulb… ☺)

Reply to  David Middleton
November 13, 2016 4:10 am

You can buy your incandescent bulbs in New Jersey and have them shipped to you. The prices are good too.
http://www.newcandescent.com/

higley7
Reply to  terastienstra
November 10, 2016 9:04 am

You are reading it wrong. “Climate Change” when mentioned by a global warming advocate means “global warming caused by human activities.” Real changes in climate happen constantly, of course, but they are talking about policies that are against humans thriving based on false data and fatally flawed climate computer models.
Having a real denier in the White House is the best result of all. CO2 IS PLANT FOOD and WE NEED MORE NOT LESS as Earth cools for the next 30–120 years. CO2 is the minting growth factor for most plants, ao we need more.
“Greenhouse gases” are a fabrication by the global warming cabal. These are really “radiative gases” that serve to col the planet at night and have virtually no net effect during the day. CO2 is not a pollutant and, even if it was, its benefits FAR OUTWEIGH its drawbacks, if any.

Reply to  higley7
November 10, 2016 9:43 am

“climate change” means whatever one wants it to mean.
It is actually a meaningless term because the climate is always changing on our planet, for the past 4.5 billion years, and we should be thankful the current climate is about as good as it has even been for humans, animals and the green plants we/they eat.
For leftists “climate change” means:
Since about 1975, we have been living in the early stages of a runaway greenhouse warming that will eventually end life on Earth as we know it. This coming catastrophe is being caused by humans burning fossil fuels. It can be stopped by humans doing everything we leftists say, without question.
When described correctly, you might think only im-beciles would believe this climate change fantasy.
And you would be correct
If climate change meant only: “global warming caused by human activities”, then it would not scare many people.
The leftist goal is to scare people, and then tell them how to live.
The current fictional boogeyman is climate change.
If that stops scaring, there will be another fictional boogeyman.
I’m betting on exploding silicone breast implants.
I’m already preparing my application for a government grant for further study.

george e. smith
Reply to  higley7
November 10, 2016 10:50 am

Climate change mean the Antarctic Highlands sometimes are different from the North African deserts, although both are deserts, so there must be some cause for that difference. Damned if I know why. Both are subject to human influences.
g

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  higley7
November 10, 2016 12:59 pm

It is the difference between climate change and Climate Change (TM).

Michael J. Dunn
Reply to  higley7
November 10, 2016 2:33 pm

I disagree with your dismissal of “greenhouse gases.” Their effect is precisely what is predicted by radiative transfer theory and the absorption/emission spectrum of the gases. What cools the planet at night is radiative emission from the Earth’s surface. If the greenhouse gas concentration were to increase dramatically (such as by water appearing in the form of a blanketing cloud), then the cooling is inhibited by the insulating effect of re-radiation. If you want a cold night, look for a clear sky. If you want a moderate night, hope for cloud cover. (I live in the Pacific northwest and it is like this all the time.)

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  terastienstra
November 10, 2016 9:17 am

She also refers to ‘climate advocates’ and ‘climate leaders’. What the heck do those terms mean? Heck, I advocate the climate keep on keeping on. And why don’t the ‘climate leaders’ lead the climate to the point we want it to stay at. Where ever that ideal point is.
Rhetorical nonsense.

MarkW
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 11:20 am

I advocate for more climate. You can’t have too much climate.

gnome
Reply to  terastienstra
November 10, 2016 3:27 pm

But don’t you love the reference to the nation’s “climate leaders” in the text. Luckily I’ve never denied being a “climate denier” so now I can freely say “some deny the climate and some lead it”. Meaningful ++!

Michael Kelly
Reply to  terastienstra
November 11, 2016 1:37 am

I beg your pardon! There is no such thing as “climate”! There, I said it!

Marcus
Reply to  Latitude
November 10, 2016 9:07 am

OK, too much information !!! LOL

Latitude
Reply to  Marcus
November 10, 2016 10:14 am

LOL…well it’s true!

Marcus
Reply to  Marcus
November 10, 2016 10:19 am

…Ok, I will secretly agree…Shhhhhhhh……lol

Latitude
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:22 am

yeah…but he tweeted that Jan 2014
It’s been a slow building romance….LOL

Latitude
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:55 am

..bro-mance I guess 🙂

David L. Hagen
Reply to  Latitude
November 10, 2016 10:28 am

Marianne Lavelle: Climate Equivocator
By declaring Trump a “climate denier” Marianne Lavelle appeals to the political redefinition of “climate change” by the UN FCCC as due to anthropogenic causes, yet objects when people use scientific definition of “climate change” as long term variation in atmospheric conditions.
Lavalle further “tars and feathers” Trump by insinuation of denying the Holocaust and being anti-science, when he objects to the UNFCCC political definition and the objective lack of convincing scientific evidence.
Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary:

EQUIVOCA’TION, noun Ambiguity of speech; the use of words or expressions that are susceptible of a double signification. Hypocrites are often guilty of equivocation and by this means lose the confidence of their fellow men. equivocation is incompatible with the christian character and profession.
EQUIV’OCATE, verb intransitive To use words of a doubtful signification; to express one’s opinions in terms which admit of different senses; to use ambiguous expressions. To equivocate is the dishonorable work of duplicity. The upright man will not equivocate in his intercourse with his fellow men.

Merriam Webster online

Equivocate: to use unclear language especially to deceive or mislead someone

Equivocation (also known as: doublespeak)

Description: Using an ambiguous term in more than one sense, thus making an argument misleading. . . .
Tip: When you suspect equivocation, substitute the word with the same definition for all uses and see if it makes sense.

The foundational problem and source of this equivocation is that the UN’s FCCC REDEFINED “Climate Change”

FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE, Article 1, Definitions:
2. “Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.

See also: Redefining Dangerous Climate Change

gnomish
Reply to  Latitude
November 10, 2016 1:23 pm

Some of the most controversial proposals Donald Trump made while running for US president were gone from his campaign website by Thursday, including his call to bar Muslims from entering the country and his promise to cancel the Paris Climate Agreement.
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-muslim-ban-removed-from-website-2016-11
and you were born every minute

Reply to  Latitude
November 10, 2016 2:09 pm

Wonderful! I can’t get enough! The world will follow. Bit by bit, step by step. Politicians all around the world right now are taking notes and learning from this. President Trump is leading the way back to sanity and self-respect for all. This is going to be truly historical and HUGE.

Reply to  A.D. Everard
November 10, 2016 5:50 pm

Hey man – the Brits started this I’d like to remind you – like we always do.

Reply to  A.D. Everard
November 10, 2016 6:19 pm

Hey man back at you, I won’t argue with that, Cephus0, although it might be said an Aussie gave it the first go.
What I’m so excited about with Trump is that no one owns him. He doesn’t owe anyone any favors and no one’s got hold of any strings. He got there on his own dime.
Brexit was – and is – FANTASTIC and the alarmists are running scared. Trump just magnified that ten-fold and now Gang-Green (gangrene) is truly panicking. It’s all the juicier for them totally – TOTALLY – not expecting it.
I so love this year 2016. 🙂

Mario Lento
Reply to  A.D. Everard
November 12, 2016 11:52 am

Can I say Hope and Change please? But mean it in a different way? My way!

MarkW
November 10, 2016 8:42 am

I feast on your tears.

Marcus
November 10, 2016 8:42 am

“They had already prepped their wish lists for Clinton that included a massive clean energy spending program”
So, in other words, they are unhappy that Trump will take away their Taxpayer paid retirement fund ?

Reply to  Marcus
November 10, 2016 2:10 pm

Yup.

Reply to  Marcus
November 10, 2016 3:40 pm

Short Solar City. TSLA has been down all week long. The Green Agenda is doomed now that they can not walk into the WH to discuss the future energy needs of the nation. Forever gone is Hillary’s crazy 500 million installed solar panels over the next 4 years.

November 10, 2016 8:42 am

When anyone says “carbon pollution”, you know it’s all propaganda and BS.

steveta_uk
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 10, 2016 10:40 am

“Carbon pollution” may be a real problem, if they’re concerned about soot in the Arctic. Otherwise, meh.

Ricdre
Reply to  steveta_uk
November 10, 2016 12:04 pm

Was “Nomad” really a Green program? It would make sense since its most common comment was “Sterilize, Sterilize” which does seem to be the same program that the Greens have for the human race in general.

MarkW
November 10, 2016 8:43 am

I thought India had passed us to take over the number two CO2 emitter spot.

John W. Garrett
November 10, 2016 8:44 am

While it’s a delight to win this battle in the war, be wary of triumphalism.
The CO-2 Klimate Krazies aren’t going to go away. They’ve had a taste of what junk science came very close to accomplishing.

Marcus
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:14 am

I agree Dave, it will protect America for at least the next 30 years…And hopefully that effect will infect Canada…If not, I am moving back to the good old U.S.A. to finish my retirement…

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 1:02 pm

Didn’t Justice Ginsberg state that she would move to New Zealand if Trump one? Can we start a collection to buy her a one-way ticket (first class, of course).

Mario Lento
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
November 10, 2016 1:11 pm

Hannity will buy her ticket if she agrees to stay for 5 years or the duration of her life, whichever comes first.

Michael J. Dunn
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 2:37 pm

All the more reason for honest men to proclaim reason and truth clearly and with vigor. Trump has opened the door. We have no one to blame if we sit on the sidelines. (I realize that most of the participants on this page are probably active, but this is an exhortation for all those who are content merely to be on this page: do more.)

SMC
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 3:22 pm

I may have enough airline points to get her a one way first class ticket…have to check to be sure. But, if I do, I’ll be happy to volunteer them.

John W. Garrett
Reply to  David Middleton
November 11, 2016 5:57 am

I hope you’re right.
It’s going to be far more difficult to “Drain The Swamp” than many people comprehend. The 49% will fight tooth and nail for every inch. In the long run, I suspect (and fear) this will be seen as simply one more battle in a long, long war.

Climate Dissident
Reply to  John W. Garrett
November 10, 2016 9:28 am

But the US has always been on control of the earth’s temperature; I’m pretty sure “adjusting” will be gone.

PiperPaul
Reply to  Climate Dissident
November 10, 2016 9:42 am

No, the Climate Knobs (I’m not naming names) in the US have been in control of earth’s “temperature”.

Reply to  John W. Garrett
November 10, 2016 12:15 pm

Is a “trumphalism” what I think it is? Had the same thought as my wife when first seeing the eraser over Obama’s face.

John W. Garrett
Reply to  John W. Garrett
November 17, 2016 11:01 am

The counter-attack has commenced:
“Hundreds of U.S. Businesses Urge Trump To Uphold the Paris Climate Deal”
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/17/502425711/hundreds-of-u-s-businesses-urge-trump-to-uphold-paris-climate-deal

Marcus
November 10, 2016 8:44 am

“At first, that will mean an effort to block Trump’s plans, perhaps by convincing Senate Democrats to block appointments or use the filibuster”
And Trump will convince both houses to use the “Nuclear Option”, just like dishonorable Harry Reid did…

Marcus
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 10:17 am

But so far, the Republicans have been unwilling to use that option….Go figure ?

MarkW
Reply to  Marcus
November 10, 2016 11:25 am

No need to use the nuclear option in the House, they don’t have filibusters.
Isn’t it fascinating how the Democrats get all bent out of shape whenever Republicans use tactics that they invented.
It was Harry Reid who invented the tactic of calling pro-forma sessions during the winter break in order to prevent Bush from making recess appointments. When the Republicans did it to block Obama, it was the most evil thing ever done in the history of DC.

hunter
November 10, 2016 8:50 am

The reactionaries that lead opinion in the climate obsessed community are going to become the John Birchers of the 21st century, spouting off on intricate grand conspiracies and the equivalent fluoridated drinking water. Climate obsession is more of a failed sci-fi story plot- sciencey veneer on a worn out scary end of the earth story. One told since at least the time of the writers of the Noah’s Ark story.

Reply to  hunter
November 10, 2016 12:21 pm

Try Gilgamesh; even earlier. Many have observed over time that to rule people, all you have to do is scare them. Instead of outsiders, gods, monsters, etc., they just started using “science.”

November 10, 2016 8:50 am

It is now the time to rhetorically wash the green blob with holy water and bury it in a crossroads with a stake in its heart. Do unto others as they would do unto you, but do it first!

Reply to  Tom Halla
November 10, 2016 12:23 pm

I LIKE Tom. [Think Scotty, Star Trek.]

Reply to  Dave Fair
November 10, 2016 1:05 pm

Thank you, Dave

bit chilly
Reply to  Tom Halla
November 10, 2016 5:56 pm

i think that is metaphorically likely to be the outcome of steyn vs mann now . mikey must be worried more than most at this moment in time.

Trebla
November 10, 2016 8:50 am

Looks like the climate change gravy train (renewables powered, of course) just ran out of steam. What did you expect from an intermittent, unreliable source anyway?

Griff
Reply to  Trebla
November 10, 2016 9:06 am

will California, NY, Hawaii, Texas and Iowa change tack on renewables?

Marcus
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 9:10 am

…When they have to pay the ACTUAL price, YES !

Marcus
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 9:11 am

…Wait, I forgot the…HA HA !!

Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 9:11 am

Yes, as soon as the federal subsidies are removed

Resourceguy
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 9:15 am

Will Ivanpah shut down?

Resourceguy
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 9:24 am

The inefficient rooftop installer lobby will not go away even if it is 8x more costly than utility and community scale solar.

PiperPaul
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 9:45 am

Will Ivanpah shut down?
Why would Donald’s wife do that?

Curious George
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 10:17 am

Concentrated solar like Ivanpah is expensive because of large construction costs. The production and maintenance expenses are not huge (I hope). It makes little sense to shut them down; the mistake was to build them – but that money has been spent already. How about Google absorbing construction costs?

benofhouston
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 10:21 am

Wind and solar make significant extreme sense in Hawaii since their location makes everything else far more expensive. I would like to see some geothermal there. It should be economical given the volcanoes.

beng135
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 12:44 pm

I agree w/others that Federal subsidies for renewables should end completely — they’ve been going long enough for the industrial bases & installations to develop.
If states want to subsidize, fine.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 1:15 pm

Griff November 10, 2016 at 9:06 am
Why think small? WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS WILL DO TO CHINA’S WIND TURBINE AND SOLAR PANEL PRODUCTION AND TRADE? Sorry for yelling at the top of my lungs but I am giddy.
This is going to be fun.
michael

Joel Snider
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 2:37 pm

‘will California, NY, Hawaii, Texas and Iowa change tack on renewables?’
No, probably not. The powers that be will continue to piss away ‘other people’s money’ due to the complete lack of accountability government affords itself.

Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 5:41 pm

Resourceguy asks:
Will Ivanpah shut down?
That needs to happen – ASAP!
Thank the Creator for giving America a candidate who fights. A guy who refused to give up. A guy who had to fight and beat sixteen other candidates during the Primaries — and then he had to fight not just the opposition candidate, but half of his own Party!
He had to fight Big Media too, including every television network, every big city newspaper, and every Spanish language radio station — plus censoring of supportive comments by Facebook, Twitter, and the ‘comments’ sections of newspapers like the WaPo, the NY/LA Times, and many others. The President Elect won for one simple reason: because he wouldn’t give up.
That’s the kind of President this country needs: someone who will fight for our country, not someone who is constantly apologizing for it.
Regarding Ivanpah, the Snowflake contingent would need industrial strength smelling salts if they were aware of the hundreds of birds being incinerated every day by Ivanpah:comment image
But the media won’t show people what’s really happening at Ivanpah because their ‘news’ is massaged, filtered, and spoon-fed to the public.
Most folks aren’t aware of the birds being killed and maimed by the hundreds — every day.
Each smoke trail in that link is a bird being incinerated in mid-flight. The killing of wildlife goes on at Ivanpah whenever the sun shines.
[source]
Question: Where is Greenpeace??
…or Treehugger? Or Tamina, or Mann, or Hotwhopper, or all the other “renewables” promoters, grifters, hucksters, enviros, and self-serving eco-shills? Are any of them apologizing for this deliberate wildlife destruction? Do they even question it?
Answer: No. They’re hiding out as usual, just like they hide out from all fair, impartial debates.
The engineers who designed the Ivanpah bird cooker aren’t stupid. They knew it would kill birds. We knew it, too. Focusing several acres of solar radiation into an area of a few square metres that birds fly through… duh!
But after seeing how easily Solyndra looted the Treasury with no repercussions, they jumped on the eco-bandwagon with this insane version of ‘Solyndra 2.0’.
That leaves Griff, who started this sub-thread. I have a question for him:
Griff, please give us your 2¢ on Ivanpah: Have ‘renewables’ gone too far? Is the daily slaughter of hundreds of birds A-OK with you? Is the Ivanpah bird slaughter considered acceptable collateral damage in the Noble Cause of ‘climate change’?
Honestly, Griff, what do you think about Ivanpah? Are you ready to draw the line there? Will you finally say: “Shut down Ivanpah, STAT”?
At some time everyone wants a chance for redemption. This is your chance, Griff…

Kaiser Derden
November 10, 2016 8:51 am

gee … he’s considering putting energy experts in charge of the Dept of Energy … wow, this is my shocked face …

bit chilly
Reply to  Kaiser Derden
November 10, 2016 5:58 pm

that was my first reaction as well. who would think someone would have the sense to install experts as opposed to advocates in government positions ,what a novel idea .

Marcus
November 10, 2016 8:54 am

“President-elect Donald Trump is not a “climate denier.”
So true, the only REAL “D’Niers” are those on the left that think the climate has always stayed the same for 4.5 billion years….Maybe we should call them the “Ice Age D’niers” ??

Reply to  Marcus
November 10, 2016 2:16 pm

That has a good ring to it.

CodeTech
November 10, 2016 8:55 am

See what happens when you bypass the rules and try to change everything with executive orders? That’s right… the next guy undoes everything.
Maybe we’re descending into an ice-age kind of loop, where for 8 years the coal and oil industries are crippled and broken, then 8 years of rebuilding and production. You can see how much the left are actually interested in stability and prosperity… ie. not at all.

Latitude
Reply to  CodeTech
November 10, 2016 10:18 am

the next guy undoes everything….
Code. I think the liberals have become so isolationist…they thought they would win forever

Reply to  Latitude
November 10, 2016 2:19 pm

Agreed. They thought they had everybody’s hearts and minds. They thought they had it all locked down. They thought they were unstoppable. And then someone came along and gave The People real respect and a real choice. What a wonderful day! 🙂

Menicholas
Reply to  Latitude
November 11, 2016 12:39 am

It is true…they thought they would never lose again.
That is why they are now losing their minds.
This is a bona fide case of mass hysteria as well.
These people who are freaking out because they believe their own lies…they forgot at some point that campaign smears and made up slanders are just that. So now they are whipping themselves into a froth because the devil is President.
It is scary and funny and thrilling and pathetic all at once.

November 10, 2016 8:56 am

Marcus
Reply to  Elmer
November 10, 2016 9:21 am

..OMG….Has Mikey seen the light ? I loved everything he said and I hate him….That’s scary..

Reply to  Marcus
November 10, 2016 10:35 am

He actually said this BUT he continued on after he said “It will feel good” to trash Trump and promote Hillary. But that doesn’t change the fact that these words ended up being prophetic.

Latitude
Reply to  Elmer
November 10, 2016 10:23 am

>stunned<

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Elmer
November 10, 2016 1:08 pm

Will he move to Canada, too?

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
November 10, 2016 8:03 pm

No thank you!

MarkW
Reply to  Elmer
November 10, 2016 1:12 pm

One problem. Trump’s plan can’t work.
The end result is that the plants will still close, because they are losing money.
The only difference is that some other foreign plant will be supplying the cars, not Ford’s. Probably not even an American company.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  MarkW
November 10, 2016 1:48 pm

MarkW November 10, 2016 at 1:12 pm
Just go back to the trade policies of the Nineteenth Century they worked quite well. We only started to have problems after we started opening our doors predatory trade.
Only allow a 2-10% market share to imported cars. Once that number is sold imports are frozen.
Announce tariff on certain manufactured goods which we have been forced out of in our own markets. Have them go into effect starting in say 18 months. Any start up American Company gets 5- 10 year tax break.
The things we export are items other countries need. Example Japan imports agricultural product only as a luxury and little manufactured product.
If we can make it here, mine it here and grow it here, by our own hands, then we should trade first with our self’s, before allowing any imports.
michael

MarkW
Reply to  MarkW
November 10, 2016 2:36 pm

Mike, that’s a great plan if your goal is to impoverish the people of the US.
It doesn’t matter if the stuff we export is what other countries need, not if they can get them cheaper elsewhere.
Why should I be forced to pay more for stuff that often isn’t as good, just because some guy doesn’t want to compete?

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  MarkW
November 10, 2016 6:42 pm

MarkW November 10, 2016 at 2:36 pm
I understand that that has been the position pushed, but when we had tariffs and protected the jobs of our people, you did not have folks working two jobs and still not making ends meet. We have people who are the bread winners of families stuck in entry level jobs, and signing voting to raise minimum wages because people pushed so called free trade. It was a mistake; it needs to end.
” Why should I be forced to pay more for stuff that often isn’t as good, just because some guy doesn’t want to compete?”
Really? Every one competes. They are forced to, I have noticed that your argument is mainly used by those who have a captive clientele, in other words, no competition. Yes, you will pay more because just as you deserve a fair wage, so do your fellow citizens. The more people working in manufacturing and industry and natural resource harvesting, the more economic activity occurs. More wealth means more taxes at a lower rate to preform the necessary and proper tasks of Government.
Understand this, Mr Trump won this election on the votes of the “Rust Belt”. Now where do you stand, with getting your fellow citizens back to work, or the Democrats taking both the Senate and the House in two years. By “YUGE” numbers. You are falling into the same trap the media and both parties’ elites did, believing your own propaganda.
Think about it back in the 1970’s the mantra was buy American, the job you save may be your own. Too many did not heed. They used self serving excuses, as you have. Look around you. You put in an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay, as do most of the people around you.
In my years in the trade, one day I could be machining aerospace parts, the next car parts. Or who knows what they were. Have you ever done “Piece work”? So are you going to say I or my employer would not compete? Or do you really mean, I or someone like me should be paid the same as a third world worker? Because that is what it amounts to.
I know I seem harsh but its called for, Think about what I have said, and think about two years from now, that is the window we have. Remember this, the Liberals will be watching and taking notes.
still a friend
michael

Frank
Reply to  Elmer
November 10, 2016 3:02 pm

I’d love to slap a 35% tariff on cars that were once assembled in the Midwest and are now assembled in Mexico! Keep American jobs here! Unfortunately, those aren’t “American jobs”; those are private sector jobs! Donald Trump doesn’t have the right to tell an American company how to conduct its business. It he tries, it could “merge” with a foreign company headquartered overseas and tell him – in the immortal words of the wise Michael Moore – “f*** ***”.
If Trump’s intimidation succeeds, a foreign auto manufacturer can – in theory – set up an assembly plant in Mexico and have a strong competitive advantage over an inefficient plant in the Midwest. In the long run, that will probably will cost more American jobs than closing a single inefficient plant.
Trump certainly could go after all foreign car assembly, but thousands of Americans now assemble cars for foreign companies here in the US in right-to-work states. Their jobs are vulnerable to retaliation. Even worse, no foreign company is going to invest in a country threatening to start a trade war. And – without the threat of competition – the UAW will regain the labor monopoly that was partially responsible for the decline of the Big Three. (Seriously, if there were no threat of competition, wouldn’t you – as an assembly line worker – vote to join the UAW and extort higher wages from your fellow Americans, who can’t buy non-union cars?)
It is easy to say: “Tear down the temple! Ignore the elite experts! However, history tells us that revolutionary change often doesn’t turn out well. With his ego, bankruptcies, authoritarianism, inexperience and other personal weaknesses, DT is a big risk. I admittedly have more to lose than the average Trump supporter. However, even those who have suffered the most from changes over the last few decades live in an American that is STILL GREAT compared with the rest of the world. Europe has never recovered from the financial crises. Greece (25% unemployment, 44% below the poverty line) is on their third bailout and 13th austerity plan under a former Communist populist admired by Bernie Sanders (http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/statement-on-the-election-in-greece). Japan is in its third decade without any economic growth, and now has a debt/GDP ratio of 225%. An Indian at the 95th percentile has the same standard of living as an American at the 5th percentile. China’s debt has tripled since 2009 to 160% of GDP, private investment has stopped growing and economic growth is being propped up by wasteful government spending on infrastructure. Their financial crisis could have a wider impact than ours in 2008.
None of this means that I’m blind to the changes of the last three decades that have disrupted the lives of many Americans and spurred the rise of BOTH Trump and Saunders/Warren. (One of these could be Trump’s successor if he fails to deliver on his unrealistic promises.) The growing concentration of wealth and income in the top 10%, and 1% and especially the top 0.1% is suppressing the demand for goods and therefore employment. With QE already producing negative real interest rates, Trump’s tax cuts for the rich are going to fuel deficits, but not new investment. Lower interest rates have driven capital into an inflated stock market, but that money is being mostly being used to fund mergers that reduce competition and employment. The mutual funds that own (rent) most publicly owned companies don’t care about anything but net quarter’s earnings. Perhaps Trump has the political capital needed to address these fundamental problems, but I suspect he will need to hire some realistic “elite” advisors to come up with a good program to confront these challenges. And which elite advisors – in foreign or economic policy – will be willing to work for a populist who disdains their expertise?
I hope Moore’s “f*** y**” doesn’t turn out to be “f*** us all”.

bit chilly
Reply to  Frank
November 10, 2016 6:12 pm

the very numbers you just used tell the story . the current system is not working for the majority. the “haves” would do well to heed the message just sent by the “have nots” at the ballot box. i do not know if trump is the man to effect meaningful change, but if he is not after stating his position ,he will pay a heavy price and at some point in the not too distant future the people of america and other developed nations will start electing some very unsavoury characters.
the last lot of elites though they could carry on unabated right up to the point their heads were dropping into a basket. i would hope the current lot would have history to warn them of the path they are treading.

Mario Lento
Reply to  Frank
November 10, 2016 6:24 pm

If we have a “right to work”, then there is no good reason we would need to go oversees to make cars and bring them back. Japan makes great cars with American labor, as you say, where there is a right to work. So, lowering the corporate tax and allowing states to have the right to work protection, should enable production to thrive. This is how states are supposed to be laboratories of democracy and should set the example. States that allow unions to force people not to work should take the issue to the ballot box.

November 10, 2016 8:57 am

Just like after Brexit, the marxopath press wailed doom and disaster, but the real world consequences have been mostly positive. Now the Trumpocalypse leads to this “disastrous” instant improvement in international relations with Russia and also the Phillipines:
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/10/asia/duterte-trump-military-exercises/index.html
“its the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine” (REM)

Griff
Reply to  ptolemy2
November 10, 2016 9:07 am

Hmmm – I thought Duterte was cosying up to the Chinese?

Rhoda R
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 2:06 pm

He had been. Duterte despises Obama and probably didn’t see anything better in Clinton. Trump won and now the USA isn’t looking so bad as a partner again.

Reply to  ptolemy2
November 10, 2016 9:26 am

Griff
Good foreign policy is to cozy up to everyone.
It’s not a zero sum game.

steveta_uk
Reply to  ptolemy2
November 10, 2016 10:50 am

Positive? Have you seen the price of Marmite? Have you seen the new Toblerone?

Harry Passfield
Reply to  steveta_uk
November 10, 2016 1:08 pm

Yes. (Sob – as in weep! – then again…)

Griff
November 10, 2016 9:05 am

“Seven of the eight Koch-backed Senate candidates were victorious”
It doesn’t bother anyone that rich fossil fuel interests bankroll candidates?
I mean they are surely part of an establishment elite and not doing much for your average blue collar worker?
(except tangentally for the odd coal miner)

A C Osborn
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:56 am

You forgot Tanker Drivers, garage attendants and every kind of Plastic Industry known to man.

Marcus
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 10:28 am

David, you also forgot the surveyors, who are second on the scene, to map out the area of interest and to cut clear paths to the area..I tried it for 3 months ( I was a laid off Iron Worker) and it was a hot, sweaty, itchy, physically challenging job…I was so glad to get back on the the “steel”, I gladly took a pay cut…

Latitude
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 11:12 am

shhhh…..let’s see how long it takes Griff to realize Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Qatar are rich fossil fuel interests
…and what the Clinton Foundation is

MarkW
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 11:30 am

How many blue color workers have to pay for energy?

Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:31 pm

Who will donate to the Clinton Foundation now? It will be a scream to see the Clinton political flunkies out of a job!

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 1:14 pm

And the railroads employees.

phaedo
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 9:45 am

Keep it up Griff, your doing sooooo well.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 10:19 am

And who did George Soros back?

MarkW
Reply to  Tom in Florida
November 10, 2016 11:31 am

Soros didn’t get his money from evil oil. He got it from bankrupting countries.

Latitude
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 10:27 am

It doesn’t bother anyone that rich fossil fuel interests bankroll candidates?
absolutely….especially when they pay people to riot, threaten, attack…
…when they pay to play politicians under the table
etc……….

Joe Civis
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 10:32 am

hmmm it doesn’t bother you or the progressives that Soros funded Hillary and thugs to create violence and discord at peaceful Trump events? Does/did it bother Hillary or the progressives when Soros funded violence at the other “social” protests? Also wasn’t it the progressives and President Obama that gloated and gave the finger to conservatives when they won the election and said “elections have consequences” or is that only when your/their side wins one? Green and progressives are synonymous with hypocrisy!
Cheers!!
Joe

rocketscientist
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 10:45 am

All of the anti-energy policies have a common effect, that of driving up the cost of manufacturing. Higher costs to create or operate a factory has the obvious effect of driving manufacturing jobs off-shore. High cost of labor is still an issue, but reducing the operating costs will be large incentive for bringing back factory jobs for the unemployed in areas like the rust belt.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 11:30 am

The Koch Industries and Foundations have provided wealth to people (100,000 employees) and charities beyond your imagination. If you try, you can find most (not all) of their contributions on the web. Allow for some time, more if you read slowly.
By the way, Al Gore’s family accumulated their riches via politics and fossil fuel interests. Do you trash Al, also.

MarkW
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 11:30 am

Note that Griff, and the rest of the left wing never complain when Soros backs candidates.
Secondly, Koch brothers obeyed the campaign finance laws which proves that they did not bankroll these candidates.

Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 12:02 pm

Not as much as HRC getting 20% of her campaign financed by the House of Saud or her being a George Soros sock-puppet.
I guess I’m just not up to date with why the Kocks are the epitome of Evil(tm).

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 12:28 pm

It bothers me more that a foreigner, George Soros, is spending tens to hundreds of millions of dollars trying to mold our political landscape to suit his world view.

gallopingcamel
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
November 10, 2016 12:40 pm

Foreign or domestic is irrelevant. Money runs our political system. Always has, always will.

MarkW
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
November 10, 2016 1:15 pm

And there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Every attempt to try and limit this money just makes those doing the donating work harder to hide the money they are donating.
The money doesn’t stop, it just uses new channels.
As long as government controls buying and selling, the first thing bought and sold will be politicians.
PJ O’Rourke

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 1:13 pm

And Tom Steyr purportedly spent $US27M on the California election. Doesn’t bother me – it’s his money.

AndyG55
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 1:16 pm

“rich fossil fuel interests bankroll candidates”
You mean, as opposed to BIG GREEN buying off candidates or others using money syphoned off from Haiti donations?

hunter
Reply to  Griff
November 10, 2016 2:03 pm

It bothers me more- a lot more- that Soros, Bezos, and other even wealthier billionaires are buying up the politics of whole states. Bezos to protect his Amazon monopoly distributing counterfeit and faux goods, Soros, because he is hoping to be the James Bond bad guy who actually wins apparently(lol).
No, the Koch brothers are at least as free to back candidates they like as you or me. Or even slime balls like Soros or Bezos. People liked what the candidates stand for in large enough numbers to elect them.
You are just a whiny sore loser whose obsession on CO2 is falling apart and your smug self-declared superiority is falling apart.
Toughsky Schtufsky.

Resourceguy
November 10, 2016 9:14 am

The sun is a little brighter today…and the fog of advocacy science is clearing out.

subtle2
Reply to  Resourceguy
November 10, 2016 1:11 pm

Shouldn’t that read: current –occupier–of the White House ?

Greg61
November 10, 2016 9:13 am

As the current resident of the Whitehouse said ‘Elections have consequences’

G. Karst
November 10, 2016 9:14 am

Oooooh The schadenfreude is just too orgasmatically intense for words. Such pleasure must be wrong somehow. 🙂 GK

Reply to  G. Karst
November 10, 2016 9:37 am

no, nothing wrong can feel this good!!!

SMC
Reply to  bill capron
November 10, 2016 3:40 pm

Well, just make sure you wear a raincoat.

November 10, 2016 9:14 am

Trump should FIRE Gavin Schmidt and return NASA GISS to its created purpose: “to perform basic research in space sciences in support of GSFC (Goddard Space Flight Center) programs.”
It was never created to study climate change.

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  skepticgonewild
November 10, 2016 9:22 am

I don’t think Dr. Schmidt is an appointee, but a Federal employee. This makes it hard to fire him. But what President Trump could do is zero out the funding for GISS. And a lot of other climate science labs in NASA and NOAA. And the National Endowment for the Arts. But I dream…

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 9:41 am

…. but who would be the conscientious stewards of the global climate record then ??
Oh, hold on a sec ….

PiperPaul
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 9:51 am

This makes it hard to fire him.
Climate research in northern Alaska 50 weeks / year. Or maybe tagging and counting polar bears.

Marcus
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 10:12 am

Simply reassign him to cleaning toilets, he good with crap !!

rocketscientist
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 10:53 am

Well, before you go shooting yourself in the foot (or my foot ) you might want to realize that the first A in NASA stands for Aeronautical. If you think we don’t need airplanes or high speed transportation by all means zero out NASA. Understand that I am not a fan of NASA as a whole, in that they have a bloated standing army of marginally useful people.
Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water just yet, perhaps merely a diet would suffice to reduce the bloat.

wws
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 11:23 am

What I would like to see him do is to relocate the GISS to Nome, Alaska, and require ALL Federal Employees of the GISS to move there year round.
I think most would suddenly see the wisdom of early retirement.

MarkW
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 11:35 am

Let Boing and company pay for any research into aeronautics. They are the ones that benefit from it.

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 12:06 pm

Mumbles McGuirck “I don’t think Dr. Schmidt is an appointee, but a Federal employee. This makes it hard to fire him.”
How about a 4 year tour of duty in Antarctica?

MarkW
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 1:16 pm

Give him a windowless office in the sub-basement. No computer, no books, just a desk and ergonomically deficient chair.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 1:17 pm

David Middleton –
Please remember that the first A in NASA is aeronautics. It gets short shrift compared to the space side of NASA, but it might behoove the US to actually increase its spending in the atmospheric flight sciences, at least a bit.

Chimp
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 1:24 pm

Why did NASA have to hire a Brit and NCAR a Kiwi to make up packs of science fiction lies? Weren’t there enough dishonest, GIGO computer gamers who are American citizens?

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 2:37 pm

Okay note the name Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Now read the link and what the Institute is really doing.
Now I think it is time for a preformance review in regards Dr Schmidt’s cotrebution to “Space Studies”. Now many manned rocket launchs has he been a been involved with? Which launch vehicles has he work on? Which probes which expeiments?
If the answer is none and the climate lab is shut down then his position disappears, and like any other employee whos job is elimanated he is out on the sidewalk. Not fired “Layed off” And have to wait it out in the unemployment line.
Of course he can request too be .. oh I should just type it out, “Retire Aged Personal Early (D)”
😀
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddard_Institute_for_Space_Studies
michael

Janus100
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 8:09 pm

“Aeronautics” not “astronautics”
“The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is an independent agency of the executive branch of the United States federal government responsible for the civilian space program as well as aeronautics and aerospace research.[note 1]”

joelobryan
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
November 10, 2016 10:38 pm

Chimp asks why US hires a Brit and a Kiwi as climate liars at NASA and NCAR.
Answer: It’s harder for the American ear to hear their quibbling climate lies when they have an accent.

jvcstone
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 10:55 am

David–it seems that every “well intended” government bureaucracy suffers from mission creep. that is something that has needed addressing for many years. My hope is that the government can get off of it’s BS track, and start dealing with issues that urgently need addressing. Foreign policy would be at the top of my list.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:34 pm

You’ve got it wrong twice now. It’s
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
not “Astronautics”

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 1:22 pm

Sorry, folks, but from NASA’s website, a few minutes ago: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. It has always been aeronautics. “Astronautics and Space” would be redundant. (My degree is in aeronautics and astronautics.) I know that the proponents od CAGW / CC like to change things, but this hasn’t changed.

rocketscientist
Reply to  David Middleton
November 11, 2016 8:03 am

Apology accepted.

Reply to  skepticgonewild
November 10, 2016 9:31 am

Gavin Schmidt @ClimateOfGavin
So just who was it that stepped on that Cretaceous butterfly? I’d like to have a word…
8:12 AM – 9 Nov 2016

wws
Reply to  vukcevic
November 10, 2016 11:24 am

I gotta give Gavin credit, that’s pretty clever. I know exactly the story he’s referencing.

Reply to  skepticgonewild
November 10, 2016 9:54 am

Michael E. Mann ‏@MichaelEMann 18h18 hours ago
Didn’t understand how @realDonaldTrump won the election until I received this email this evening:comment image

Latitude
Reply to  vukcevic
November 10, 2016 1:09 pm

oh nooooos…….Hillary took the wrong pill

AndyG55
Reply to  vukcevic
November 10, 2016 1:18 pm

“Hillary took the wrong pill”
Which one of the dozen or so a day, was the wrong one?

Latitude
Reply to  vukcevic
November 10, 2016 1:56 pm

…the one that makes you smaller

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  vukcevic
November 10, 2016 2:48 pm

Latitude November 10, 2016 at 1:56 pm
…the one that makes you smaller
okaay Ill go ask Alice
michael

MarkW
Reply to  skepticgonewild
November 10, 2016 2:38 pm

We already subsidize the sale of Boing products, now you want the US to pick up the tab for their research as well?

jaffa68
November 10, 2016 9:18 am

“carbon pollution” – since all known life is carbon based I think most of the carbon pollution on the planet is currently attending COP22

Tom
November 10, 2016 9:20 am

I am afraid that the climate crazies will just shift their focus to the individual states. It will be a problem to fight on fifty fronts.

wws
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 11:43 am

They haven’t made much headway in Texas. And in places like California, where they are succeeding at the moment, guess what their prize is? Less jobs, and a WHOLE lot less tax revenue for the state. Ooops, sooner or later somebodies gonna start missing all that cash.

Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:40 pm

With The Donald in, CA will rapidly run out of OPM (Other People’s Money).

SMC
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 3:46 pm

And now they (California) want to secede. They’ll be broke in no time if they try.

DredNicolson
Reply to  David Middleton
November 11, 2016 11:12 am

No longer a state = no Interstate Commerce Clause = no more tariff-free electric umbilical cord to keep their Green energy dreamchild alive.
Plus, NorCal could then break from SoCal and ask to be re-annexed as its own state, like they’ve wanted to do for over a century.
So by all means, let ’em secede. May the door hit them on the way out.

Reply to  Tom
November 10, 2016 9:16 pm

Making sue and settle illegal will end the game.

November 10, 2016 9:38 am

Well surely there’s still enough money in the Clinton Foundation for Hillary to continue to “tackle climate” ?

Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:55 am

As far as I’m concerned, she can tackle this:
[snip – policy violation -mod]
Apologies for my juvenile behavior

Marcus
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 10:33 am

…Ummmmm, Phil, she may use that in a way you did not intend…it has probably been a while, judging by Bill’s habits…

Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:35 pm

Sorry mod. I didn’t realize. I’ve seen worse.

Reply to  philincalifornia
November 10, 2016 10:30 am

Clintons will be fine, just signed for a movie
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CC.gif

Marcus
Reply to  vukcevic
November 10, 2016 10:37 am

..OMG…I use to love those comedies !!! Wow, I am old….lol

MarkW
Reply to  philincalifornia
November 10, 2016 11:38 am

Is tackling climate tougher than tackling a running back?

Reply to  philincalifornia
November 10, 2016 12:41 pm

Not at the expense of her lifestyle, she won’t. Anyway, she doesn’t give a rat about anything but herself.

joelobryan
November 10, 2016 9:40 am

“perhaps by convincing Senate Democrats to block appointments or use the filibuster.”

When Harry Reid nuked the filibuster in November 2013, what he did was to remove all Federal Judge and all Executive-Administrative appointments (cabinet secretaries/deputies, all the president’s political appointees to boards and commissions, etc) from the Filibuster-Cloture rule (but not the US Supreme Court Justice appointments and legislation). Thus Republicans only need 51 votes to affirm all of President Trumps’ executive branch appointments.
The US Senate will likely have 52 Republicans when the 115th Congress is sworn this January 2017.
So as for blocking appointments, there will be nothing for the Greens/Libtards/Demo-rats to do but more whining. tantrums, crying, and then blaming the Dishonest one-eyed Harry Reid for making their plight even worse.
And OBTW in a bit of even more schadenfreude, Ole One-eyed Reid, expecting for Hillary as President to follow Obama, said in October 2016 that he had laid the groundwork to further nuke the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees. Too funny.

MarkW
Reply to  joelobryan
November 10, 2016 11:40 am

The vice president breaks ties in the Senate, so the Republicans only need 50 votes.

joelobryan
Reply to  MarkW
November 10, 2016 12:31 pm

which is 51 votes.

Reply to  joelobryan
November 10, 2016 12:39 pm

I don’t think they’ve come out of denial for long enough yet to comprehend the Supreme Court nominee issue. There are other seriously old Judges on there too. It could get even more interesting.

Chimp
Reply to  joelobryan
November 10, 2016 12:49 pm

Justice Ginsburg will be 84 in March, Kennedy 81 in July and Breyer 79 in August. Sotomayor will turn only 63 in June, but has health problems.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  joelobryan
November 10, 2016 1:26 pm

Is it wrong to enjoy the law of unintended consequences catch up with the Democrats? And, note, the law cannot be repealed by any Congress, nor is it subject to Judicial Review in any court.

November 10, 2016 9:42 am

For me it was who’s for climate change and who’s against it. There was bigger issue. A week or so ago I realized exactly what was at stake. The world was moving to a world order controlled by committee, a non elected body. That’s what Brexit was about. I saw little chance that Trump would win, the stars must have aligned. This is an American Amexit.

joelobryan
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:39 pm

The Green Blob just got its Chicxulub bolide. That first one was probably “interesting times” too.

H. D. Hoese
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 12:49 pm

I am stretching my mind for the details but I recall that the more biological agencies were moved to the USGS because they drifted away from their charge. It may have somewhat worked as geologists may be better glued to the earth. Wonder if they could handle NOAA, NASA, EPA, etc.?

Ian H
Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 3:50 pm

Look at the big clean out of climate scientists that happened recently in Australia. We can expect something similar in the US. Poetic justice. It might be dawning on some of them right about now that if you stop being objective scientists and start being political activists you subject yourself to the winds of political change. Also if you go around saying “The science is finished” people may just start asking what we are employing all these climate scientists for.

Michael Oxenham
November 10, 2016 9:44 am

Great post David. Donald Trump’s pledge can’t come soon enough. Long overdue & should be followed in the
UK.

Schrodinger's Cat
November 10, 2016 9:49 am

Perhaps the alarmists will crank up the alarmism and claim an increased rate of warming with catastrophic consequences.
Oops, I see they have done that already.

Bruce Cobb
November 10, 2016 10:01 am

The world of “climate action” has been turned upside down. Meanwhile, the world of truth, actual science, and common sense has finally been turned rightside up. The howls and tears of the Climatists just makes it all the more delightful.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 10, 2016 2:49 pm

Especially as they were so certain Clinton would nail it – by a huge margin too, as I remember. I haven’t stopped grinning since the 8th.

A C Osborn
November 10, 2016 10:03 am

They have to keep Trump alive to establish anything and that may be tricky knowing how the Establishment works.

Chimp
Reply to  A C Osborn
November 10, 2016 12:56 pm

They’ll have to bump off not just Trump, but Pence, Ryan and Hatch, then whomever the survivor nominates as cabinet secretaries.

drednicolson
Reply to  Chimp
November 11, 2016 11:25 am

And then face down a second American Revolution as most of the country enters open rebellion in response.

November 10, 2016 10:10 am

I must admit a feeling of rightness in the world in anticipating the first steps to unravel the entire global warming movement as Trump takes his presidency. I do hope he follows through on many of the anticipated moves in energy, economy and environment policy. I fear however that there is more to do in public relations, science education and public discussion so that a large segment of the public don’t fall into a deep depression or a state of constant fear based on a belief that all of what has been predicted about the man-made global catastrophe built into climate models is true, rather than a feeble academic fantasy.
Politics is largely driven by personality, perception, and image rather than substance, though this recent election may, in some ways, break that pattern. It will be too easy however for many to see Trump’s first moves as just an extension of “science denying” republican policy rather than a very rational and beneficial reconsideration of faulty policy built on flimsy science. I think we can all agree Trump was not elected based on his charming personality and good looks, but it will take some effort to reveal to the larger public the logic of what is soon to transpire.
I would really like to see a transparent public science and policy inquest in addition to the very necessary steps of unravelling the whole policy framework based on global warming dogma. The public need to see what went wrong and why many of them came to believe something so monstrous and frightening that was never supported by a solid science foundation. Until the public see and understand how they’ve been fooled, they may not realize they have been fooled.
An old anecdote and a more recent one may be relevant. King Canute had his throne placed by the sea and commanded the tides not rise in order to demonstrate to his followers that he was a mere mortal with wet feet. When Obama was elected he said it was the moment when the rise of the oceans would slow and the planet begin to heal. He also demonstrated (in the case unintentionally) that he was a mere mortal. When Trump is president one might envision him standing on the beach gazing off to the horizons stating “nice view, now let’s get to work.”

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  andrewpattullo
November 10, 2016 1:31 pm

A good first step would be an EO directing the EPA to remove CO2 from the list of pollutants within 5 working days. Then track every single derivative policy/procedure that was dependent, in whole or in part, on that designation, and cancel them.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
November 10, 2016 6:04 pm

100% agree but let’s also have an authoritative explanation for warmest believers as to why it never qualified as a pollutant

Mario Lento
Reply to  andrewpattullo
November 10, 2016 6:14 pm

CO2 being labelled as a pollutant is just another liberal method of assigning a new meaning to a word that cannot be logically understood.
-Gay no longer can be used to be happy.
-Subsidize now means keeping some of your own money
I could go on…

November 10, 2016 10:13 am

Addendum, I would also like to nominate a fellow Canadian and hero of mine, Steve McIntyre to help lead the science inquest.

Reply to  David Middleton
November 10, 2016 9:41 pm

Instead of having a science advisor, Trump should have an advisory committee for major issues like climate change and energy. Putting a Canadian or two on the committee would help us north of the border. Spencer, Micheals, Singer, Soon, Pielke Sr. , McIntyre and McKittrick would be a great bunch.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  andrewpattullo
November 10, 2016 1:31 pm

And Anthony Watts, clearly.

William Astley
November 10, 2016 10:17 am

Trump needs to change the hearts and minds of the cult of CAGW and the general population, as opposed to simply blocking their crazy policies.
Blocking the crazy cult of CAGW will only make them more crazy and will provide an issue for the next election.
It appears, Trump will get some help (get some talking points for the media to support the assertion that there is no CAGW issue to solve), as the planet was started to cool, due to the interruption of the solar cycle.

Reply to  William Astley
November 10, 2016 10:34 am

My point exactly but more efficiently stated. The public need to understand that what is about to happen is a really great change of direction for all of us.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  William Astley
November 10, 2016 11:57 am

I don’t think it’s up to Trump to change the Climate Crazy’s minds, nor do I think he could if he wanted to. One way or another, the CAGW Cult of Calamitous Climate is going down. De-fund them. Mock them. Destroy them. It’s go time. And yes, it’s fun to watch Greenie heads explode.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 10, 2016 12:29 pm

I understand the sentiment, but Trump has just 4 years till he faces the voters again and that isn’t a lot of time to prove new policy is the right policy with respect to climate and energy. I really believe some effort by a large group of scientists and educators to uncover the guts of the climate change argument and show why it is just a pyramid scheme may be worthwhile. A public trail for this nonsense and a public execution in the town sq

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 10, 2016 12:30 pm

Got cut off too soon – A public trial for this nonsense and a public execution in the town square of the entire theory would be a good thing.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 10, 2016 2:59 pm

I agree it’s a lot of fun, but I also want to see a real and public examination of facts and evidence – not computer models – a a good solid debate that the alarmists are unable to run away or hide from. It would go a long way to exposing the SC@M this has always been.
Make climate scientists accountable for their words and prophesies. Watch the certainty disappear then! People will have a chance then to learn the truth. Probably not the die-hards, but then nothing will get through to them.

Mickey Reno
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 10, 2016 3:57 pm

I agree that de-funding, mocking and ridicule should happen early and often, and also that it’s a heavy lift to change minds. But I think he should try, anyway. To them, he’s already a crazy denier, so he isn’t really risking any political capital to use his new bully-pulpit. With it he can shame the federal bureaucracy, states and local boards to stop being such scaredy-wimps, afraid of .5 degrees of warming. He should use his official power to stop giving activists and 501 groups preferential access to public employees and their work product or jobs and try to restrict \bureaucrats from attending UN or COP meetings as anything but private citizens on vacation paying with their own money. He should shame public sector unions and groups like Greenpeace to stop indoctrinating young children in CAGW or any other topic. For the school children, a memetic campaign should start that it’s science basics ONLY for children through middle school, and more abstract political sciences, public policy and environmentalism and other activism in schools is only for upper grade levels as an AP course, and then only with full balance from left and right perspectives, with old-school scientific rigor in effect if there is any science involved.

rogerknights
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 10, 2016 11:53 pm

He should establish a “science court” to which appeals can be made from phony (engineered) consensus science. Example: Bad nutrition science.

lancifer666
November 10, 2016 10:23 am

“The Seirra Club said that Trumps election is a bitter pill to swallow.”
I believe it was more of a suppository.

Marcus
Reply to  lancifer666
November 10, 2016 10:49 am

This is what the Liberal Socialists call sane people……
Caution: The following video may cause you to spontaneously burst out laughing !
The Miley Ray Cyrus rant may be unprecedentedly dangerous to your health…. you have been warned !
https://youtu.be/grD_IINiH9c

Ian H
Reply to  lancifer666
November 10, 2016 3:52 pm

Sounds like a good place to put all those defunct wind turbines.

henryp